Question ...

I have been pretty much watching everything, all manner of documentaries and videos about nutritio, disease and evolution.

In this movie about halfway through they start to talk about a narrative of human moving out of Africa, up to the temperate zones where it was said plant foods were not available year round. So they say that neanderthal and homo erectus evolved at these points to eat meat in order to better survive in these areas where there was not plant food growing all year round. OK, I can go with that for a while.

But then they go back to Africa and say that modern human came later moving out of Africa. So ... if modern humans came out from Africa and modern humans are not descendents of the lines of neanderthal and homo erectus ... we would not have adapted to eating meat, unless the meat eating was begin in Africa.

I don't see how the combine this logic to get where they are going? This documentary seems like a commercial for the Atkins low-carb diet.

All the movies I see have some things that make sense and some things that don't. I do believe that most of the recommendations that come to us come to us because an economic interests wants us to believe something and eat their product. We also know that most of the modern diet of chemical and junk food is sheer murder, and yet we have addicted ourselves to it, and would rather ration health care and sell pills than change our system to produce and eat less meat, and less processed junk food.

Why is it that we still do not seem to really know or agree upon what is best for humans to eat?